EuropeRegulation Watch
19 June 2015
BRRD transposition in Spain: a milestone in
implementing an effective resolution regime
José Carlos Pardo, Victoria Santillana and Guillermo Martín
Today it has been published in the BOE the transposition of the Bank Recovery and Resolution
Directive (BRRD) in Spain (Ley 11/2015 de recuperación y resolución de entidades de crédito y
empresas de servicios de inversión) approved by the Spanish Parliament last 11 June. It will enter
into forceon 20 June.
This is the last step on the implementation of a resolution framework which sets out the
responsibilities, instruments and powers to enable Spanish authorities (the Bank of Spain and the
FROB) to resolve failing banks in an orderly manner, by protecting critical functions and without
exposing the taxpayer to the risk of loss.
The newly implemented law substitutes the former Spanish resolution framework (Ley 9/2012)
implemented in the context of the Financial Assistance Program led by the Troika in 2012. The
new resolution powers and tools are based on four main pillars:
•
The new law sets a two-tier institutional framework. On the one hand, the Bank of Spain would
be responsible for pre-resolution tasks organized under two different units: i) the supervisor will
assess the recovery plan and ii) the new resolution unit will develop de resolution plan. On the
other hand, an independent institution (the Fondo de Restructuración Ordenada Bancaria –
FROB) will be responsible for all resolution functions on the execution phase.
•
The new resolution tools provide a wide range of options to deal with banks in troubles.
Particular attention should be paid to the new hierarchy of claims in the insolvency law
providing a maximum degree of protection for retail deposits.
•
Spain shall establish a Resolution Fund for the purpose of ensuring the effective application of
the resolution tools which will gradually be merged at the eurozone level between 2016 and
2024. This fund will be constituted by annual contributions from credit institutions with a target
level of at least 1 percent of the covered deposits of all entities. The resolution fund may
assume losses only after shareholders and debt holders have assumed losses up to at least an
8% of the liabilities. This constitutes an additional cushion for retail deposits, even for those not
covered by the deposit guarantee scheme
•
On the subordination issue Spain follows a contractual approach. In fact it changes the
Spanish Insolvency law making tier 3 debt feasible and credible. Whether or not other
European countries will implement a contractual or statutory approach is not clear yet.
However, it is worth to emphasize that a harmonized subordination scheme across Europe is
highly desirable.
1/
9
www.bbvaresearch.com
EuropeRegulation Watch
19 June 2015
The BRRD transposition process in Spain
Last 11 June the Spanish Parliament approved the transposition of the Bank Recovery and Resolution
Directive (BRRD) in Spain (Ley de recuperación y resolución de entidades de crédito y empresas de
1
servicios de inversión. (Law 11/2015, of 18 June) and it will enter into force on 20 June. This step
constitutes a key milestone in the new regulatory framework that surged in the onset of the crisis. In 2011, in
Cannes (France), the G20 members reached a commitment to implement in their local jurisdictions a new
resolution framework which should set out the responsibilities, instruments and powers to enable authorities
to resolve failing financial firms in an orderly manner, by protecting critical functions and without exposing the
taxpayer to the risk of loss.
Figure 1
Main milestones in the BRRD implementation process
Key Attributes for effective
resolution
Nov’11
BRRD agreement in
Europe
Jun’12
First Spanish
Transposition Draft
Dec’13
Jun’14
First BRRD draft
Dec’14
Final BRRD released
Jun’15
Final Spanish
Transposition
Source: BBVA Research
Two years later, on 12 December 2013, the European leaders reached a final agreement on the BRRD after
several months of negotiations between the European Commission, the European Council and the European
Parliament. Note that the first BRRD draft was launched for consultation by the European Commission in
June 2012. The enforcement of BRRD was scheduled for two dates: i) 1 January 2015 with 12 months for
transposition, and ii) the bail-in regime to impose losses on senior debt will be introduced from 2016
2
onwards. Finally, on 12 June 2014, the BRRD was published in the Official Journal of the European Union.
In parallel, the euro area leaders reached an agreement to implement a Single Resolution Mechanism
3
(SRM) for all the institutions located in the eurozone. In fact, it constitutes the third big step towards a
credible Banking Union. A centralised power of resolution is entrusted to the Single Resolution Board (SRB)
and to the national resolution authorities, and complemented with the Single Resolution Fund (SRF). The
SRM is interwoven with the process of harmonisation in the single rulebook and the establishment of the
Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) to which the application of Union prudential supervision rules is
entrusted. Supervision and resolution are two complementary aspects which are mutually dependent. It is
worth mentioning that the SRM becomes fully operative from January 2016.
The final step in the legislative process in Europe is to transpose the BRRD and SRM powers into the
national laws. In Spain, the BRRD’s transposition began in December 2014, when the Spanish Treasury
published a consultative draft law. After a long legislative procedure and several months of discussions, the
Spanish Parliament approved the new resolution law in Spain on 11 June.
Although the BRRD transposition is something new in most of the European countries, Spain did already
implement some elements of the resolution regime in the context of the Financial Assistance Programme led
by the Troika. In particular, in November 2012, the Spanish government implemented a new resolution
law, Ley 9/2012, which included a new resolution authority in Spain, the Fondo de Restructuración
Ordenada Bancaria (FROB), and provided it with a series of tools and powers to tackle banks in crisis. This
law was used by the Spanish authorities to carry out successfully the resolution of several institutions (such
1Law 11/2015, of 18 June 2015: http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2015/06/19/pdfs/BOE-A-2015-6789.pdf
2
Directive 2014/59/EU of 12 June 2014
3
Regulation 806/2014 of 15 July 2014
2/
9
www.bbvaresearch.com
EuropeRegulation Watch
19 June 2015
as Bankia or CantalunyaCaixa). Despite its robustness and effectiveness dealing with ailed Spanish banks,
the Ley 9/2012 does not include all the tools and powers of the BRRD. As shown in Table1, the new
resolution law clarifies the institutional framework and includes the transposition of those aspects of BRRD
pending implementation..
Table 1
New resolution law versus the existing Ley 9/2012
Ley 9/2012
BRRD Transposition (Law 11/2015, of 18 June)
Resolution Authority

(clarifying the Bank of Spain, FROB and SRB roles)
Resolution Plan
X

Recovery Plan
X

Early Intervention measures


Sale of business tool


Bridge institutions


Asset separation


≈ (only junior debt)

X

Resolution tools:
Bail-in
Resolution Fund
Source: BBVA Research
The new resolution institutional framework in Spain
One of the main cornerstones of the BRRD is the creation of a new authority responsible for carrying out the
pre-emptive and resolution task. Although the BRRD recommends the establishment of an unique resolution
authority, article 3 allows that on exceptional basis, more than one resolution authority may coexist even
allowing that the supervision authority assume resolution functions as long as there are arrangements to
ensure operational independence between both functions.
Spain has already a resolution authority, the FROB, which was launched in 2012. Therefore, aimed at
fulfilling the BRRD’ goals while not affecting the on-going restructuring and resolution processes (the FROB
is still carrying out the restructuring process of a few banks such as Bankia), the new Spanish resolution
Law sets up a two-tier approach:
•
•
4
The Bank of Spain will be responsible for pre-resolution tasks organized under two different units:
4
o
First, the Directorate General of Banking Supervision together with the Single Supervisory
Mechanism (SSM) will be responsible, among others, for assessing the recovery plan
developed by each bank.
o
Second, the Bank of Spain has launched a new resolution unit which will be responsible for
developing the resolution plan and analyzing how to deal with the resolvability barriers.
The FROB will be responsible for all resolution functions on the execution phase.
See the Bank of Spain organizational chart http://www.bde.es/bde/en/secciones/sobreelbanco/organizacion/Organigrama/
3/
9
www.bbvaresearch.com
EuropeRegulation Watch
19 June 2015
Figure 2
New institutional powers in Spain from June 2015
2015
Executive
Executive
resolution
resolution
authority
authority
(FROB)
(FROB)
Resolution authority –
preventive (SRB with BoS)
executive (SRB with FROB)
• Resolution plan
• Resolvability
assessment
• MREL
Supervision authority
(SSM + BoS)
• Triggering “fail or likely to
fail”
• Triggering resolution
• Carrying out the
resolution process
• Managing resolution fund
Preemptive resolution
authority (BoS)
Idem to 2015
Executive resolution
authority (FROB)
Non-significant
institutions
All institutions
Preventive
Preemptive
resolution
resolution
authority
authority
(BoS-SRB*)
(BdE)
• Recovery plan
• Triggering “fail or likely
to fail”
Supervisory
authority
(SSM + BoS)
• Recovery plan
• Triggering “fail or likely
to fail”
Significant
institutions
Supervisory
authority
(SSM + BoS)
2016 - …
(*) 2015 will be a transitional period for the SRB. It will be
fully operational from 2016.
Source: BBVA Research
5
In this vein, on 11 June 2015, the ECB has published an opinion on the separation of the resolution
powers between Bank of Spain and FROB. It welcomes the fact that the Spanish law, particularly on Chapter
VII art.57 and 58,has specific provisions on the cooperation and coordination between both Spanish
authorities and other European authorities (the SRB and the ECB).Additionally, the ECB also welcomes the
provisions on functional and hierarchical separation between the supervision duties and recovery and
preparatory resolution powers,
Nevertheless, this scheme is transitional. It will substantially be modified when the SRM will fully enter
into force in 2016. From that date on, the SRB in cooperation with the national authorities (the Bank of
Spain and the FROB) will assume at the same time the preventive and executive resolution powers for all
significant entities which account around 90 per cent of the total Spanish banking sector.
Finally it is worth mentioning that the institutional framework adopted in other EU countries, with the
exception of Finland, have opted to place the resolution authority under the same roof as the supervisory
6
authority. Nevertheless, as mentioned above, the matter is not where the functions are located but how the
organisational and coordination measures have been adopted to clearly define the roles and responsibilities
to ensure operational independence and avoiding conflicts of interest while ensuring the higher degree of
cooperation and coordination between the supervisory and resolution functions.
5
Opinion of the ECB of 10 June 2015 on the recovery and resolution of credit institutions and invest firms:
http://www.ecb.europa.eu/ecb/legal/pdf/en_con_2015_19_f_signed.pdf
6
See Box 4.1of the Bank of Spain Financial Stability Report (November 2014).
http://www.bde.es/f/webbde/Secciones/Publicaciones/InformesBoletinesRevistas/InformesEstabilidadFinancera/14/FSRNovember2014.pdf
4/
9
www.bbvaresearch.com
EuropeRegulation Watch
19 June 2015
The resolution tools in the Spanish context
The new Spanish resolution regime, which aims at transposing the BRRD and completing the existing
resolution law (Ley 9/2012), is based on four main pillars reflecting the different stages of the recovery and
resolution planning and execution:
•
Preparation and prevention: all banks must annually draw up recovery plans which will be
assessed by the supervisory functions. In parallel, resolution authorities must prepare resolution
plans that ensure the continuity of critical functions. A key element when developing the resolution
plan is the identification of the obstacles to resolvability and which measures may be imposed to
reduce or remove such impediments to resolvability.
•
Early intervention measures: the supervisor may activate the early intervention process if a bank
does not meet regulatory capital requirements or is likely to breach them. The institution must restore
its financial situation by implementing recovery measures, and/or adopting key reforms or
restructuring its debt with creditors, among other measures.
•
Resolution powers and tools: the resolution phases are activated only if the recovery or the early
intervention measures fails. Authorities would take control of the institution and activate any of the
following resolution tools: i) sale of business; ii) bridge bank; iii) asset separation, and iv) debt
conversion or write down (bail-in, the main novelty).
The bail-in tool is one of the cornerstones of the resolution process. The Ley 9/2012 already provides
bail-in powers to the Spanish resolution authority (the FROB) but only limited to junior debt. The new
law extends the bail-in powers to all types of unsecured liabilities.
Moreover, the new resolution law introduces a new hierarchy of claims in the insolvency law
providing a maximum degree of protection for retail deposits, even for those not covered by
the deposit guarantee scheme as shown in Figure 3. Although the introduction of the bail-in
radically changes the fundamentals of the unsecured creditors, the introduction of a super-seniority
feature for retail deposits versus the senior debt and corporate deposits provides them with an
enormous cushion against losses.
Figure 3
New hierarchy of claims in the Spanish insolvency law
Old Spanish hierarchy of claims
New Spanish hierarchy of claims
SME & Household depos ex-DGS
Senior debt
Corp. depos exDGS, derivatives,…
SME & Household
depos ex-DGS
Corp. depos ex-DGS,
derivatives & other
Senior debt
Debt with subordinated clauses
T2
Subordinated debt
T2
AT1
At1
Source: BBVA Research
•
Resolution Fund: European countries shall establish one or more financing arrangements for the
purpose of ensuring the effective application of the resolution tools. This fund will be funded by the
financial sector. In fact, it will be constituted by annual contributions from credit institutions with a
target level of at least 1 percent of the covered deposits of all entities to be reached in 2024.
5/
9
www.bbvaresearch.com
EuropeRegulation Watch
19 June 2015
From 2016 onwards, when the SRM will be fully operational, the national fund will gradually be merged
with other national funds from Member States of the eurozone in a Single European Resolution Fund
(SRF). Thereafter, the national resolution fund will only be operational for investment services firms.
To sum up and from an operational standpoint, the key of the new law is that, in case an entity enters
into resolution, shareholders and debt-holders (junior and senior) will have to assume losses up to at
least 8% of the liabilities before having recourse to the private resolution fund, orany kind of public
aid. After the bail-in, the Resolution Fund (national or European) can be tapped, up to a limit of 5% of the
bank’s liabilities as well.
How do Spanish authorities solve the subordination issue?
The new resolution framework seeks to avoid bail-outs with bail-in. In order for this new philosophy to be
credible, banks must have enough liabilities with loss-absorbency capacity without facing any sort of legal
challenge. In this vein, authorities would require banks to have a minimum amount of instruments that can be
legally, feasibly, effectively and operationally written down or converted into equity in case of resolution. This
is the aim of the FSB’s TLAC and the BRRD’s MREL. Based on those principles, capital instruments (CET1,
AdT1 and T2), together with long-term subordinated unsecured debt – contractually or statutorily – will be
fully eligible to comply with this new requirements.
However, doubts arise on how unsecured debt will absorb losses. As shown in Figure 3, unsecured senior
debt ranks pari-passu to instruments which are less credibly bailed out, or for where the feasibility to absorb
losses is less clear. These implies that unsecured senior debt needs to be subordinated to these instruments
to the extent that the authorities want to avoid legal challenges (and not putting at risk the principle of No
Creditor Worse Off than in Liquidation which is at the center of the resolution framework). How to structure
this subordination is a challenging question. Three different options can be used:
•
Structural: senior debt is subordinated by being issued from a pure holding company above the
operating bank.
•
Contractual: senior debt is subordinated by including contractual clauses which specifically state this
particular feature.
•
Statutory: all senior debt is subordinated by law and therefore traditional senior debt is totally
replaced by subordinated senior debt.
Structural subordination is not applicable in Spain, since Spanish banks are not structured with pure (nonoperating) holding companies. There are therefore two options left – contractual or statutory – as shown
in Figure 4.
6/
9
www.bbvaresearch.com
EuropeRegulation Watch
19 June 2015
Figure 4
Contractual subordination versus statutory subordination
Pre-BRRD
Senior debt
Corp. depos
ex-DGS,
derivaties,…
SME &
Household
depos ex-DGS
Contractual subordination
Statutory subordination
SME & Household depos ex-DGS
SME & Household depos ex-DGS
Corp. depos ex-DGS,
derivaties & other
Senior debt
Corp. depo ex-DGSs, derivatives & other
Senior debt
Debt with subordinated clauses
T2
Subordinated debt
T2
T2
AT1
At1
Subordinated debt
At1
Source: BBVA Research
The path followed in Spain to overcome the subordination issue has been the contractual one. Aimed
at easing this type of subordination, the BRRD transposition in Spain incorporates an amendment to the
national insolvency law, which provides legal certainty to the issuances of senior debt with subordination
clauses embedded (known as subordinated senior debt or Tier 3).
7
Particularly, the new resolution law has included an additional provision which changes Article 92 of the
Spanish Insolvency Law. By virtue of this amendment, there are two main characteristics:
•
•
The new hierarchy of claims is:
o
Any contractually subordinated debt which does not qualify as Tier 2 or Additional Tier 1
(the so called Tier 3)
o
Subordinated debt qualifying as Tier 2.
o
Subordinated debt qualifying as Additional Tier 1.
o
Equity instruments (CET1)
This loss-absorbing liabilities scheme is the same for insolvency than for resolution and therefore it
minimizes the risk of breaching the “No Creditor Worse Off than in Liquidation” principle.
The only question which may remain open with the Spanish approach and that should be carefully analyzed
is regarding the subordination language used in the prospectus of the outstanding Tier 2 debt, which may
not allow issuing other subordinated debt ranking above them.
This approach is different from the one currently being considered in Germany. On 10 March 2015, the
German Government launched for consultation its draft BRRD transposition, being the first European
country to propose the introduction of a statutory subordination of senior debt amending the insolvency
law.
It is true that the statutory subordination increases confidence in the effectiveness of senior debt bail-in,
helps banks to comply with the new TLAC/MREL ratio, and enhances the credibility and feasibility of the new
resolution principle “more bail-in & less bail-out.” However, this type of subordination has also some
weaknesses in terms of less financing instruments available from an issuer's perspective (probably worse),
has an unfair treatment for current investors, and would have procyclical effects as long-term funding would
be jeopardized in stressed periods.
7
Chapter VI, Section 5, Article 48
7/
9
www.bbvaresearch.com
EuropeRegulation Watch
19 June 2015
It is worth to emphasize that it is important to achieve a homogeneous and credible resolution framework
at EU level (or at least at the eurozone level), not only in terms of MREL ratio’s features but also in terms
of hierarchy of claims, for several reasons:
•
The common resolution authority (SRB) fully enters into force on 1 January 2016. It is difficult to
envisage a single authority having to deal with different hierarchies of creditors.
•
A homogenous subordination approach at EU level is critical in order to reinforce the standardization
achieved through the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive (BRRD).
•
Divergent senior debt treatment across Member States would create distortions in the way that
entities comply with TLAC/MREL requirements.
•
Markets and creditors require upfront clarity and predictability about the treatment of the instruments
they have invested in. In this vein, the lack of consistency at EU level will reduce this market
attractiveness.
•
Heterogeneous creditor hierarchies will distort the banking sector by making fund raising more
complex and therefore unnecessarily impacting competitiveness of the EU financial services sector.
8/
9
www.bbvaresearch.com
EuropeRegulation Watch
19 June 2015
DISCLAIMER
This document has been prepared by BBVA Research Department, it is provided for information purposes only and
expresses data, opinions or estimations regarding the date of issue of the report, prepared by BBVA or obtained from or
based on sources we consider to be reliable, and have not been independently verified by BBVA. Therefore, BBVA offers
no warranty, either express or implicit, regarding its accuracy, integrity or correctness.
Estimations this document may contain have been undertaken according to generally accepted methodologies and
should be considered as forecasts or projections. Results obtained in the past, either positive or negative, are no
guarantee of future performance.
This document and its contents are subject to changes without prior notice depending on variables such as the economic
context or market fluctuations. BBVA is not responsible for updating these contents or for giving notice of such changes.
BBVA accepts no liability for any loss, direct or indirect, that may result from the use of this document or its contents.
This document and its contents do not constitute an offer, invitation or solicitation to purchase, divest or enter into any
interest in financial assets or instruments. Neither shall this document nor its contents form the basis of any contract,
commitment or decision of any kind.
In regard to investment in financial assets related to economic variables this document may cover, readers should be
aware that under no circumstances should they base their investment decisions in the information contained in this
document. Those persons or entities offering investment products to these potential investors are legally required to
provide the information needed for them to take an appropriate investment decision.
The content of this document is protected by intellectual property laws. It is forbidden its reproduction, transformation,
distribution, public communication, making available, extraction, reuse, forwarding or use of any nature by any means or
process, except in cases where it is legally permitted or expressly authorized by BBVA.
9/
9
www.bbvaresearch.com